Depends on the kid, and depends on when. When you were one, you might have listened to "no", but there are plenty of kids who don't. And it matters because of things like wanting to play in the street. I can't tell a one-year-old what two tons of car moving at 30 miles an hour is going to do to them. But I can train them that every time they play in the street, it hurts.

That sounds cruel. On the other hand, letting them get hit by a car is much more cruel, and not all of us have fenced front yards.

I have no problem with spanking for safety issues. But be careful, because a kid in danger triggers fear and panic in parents, and once the crisis is over, that seems to almost automatically morph into anger. Do not spank in anger, ever.

The one time I remember being spanked as a child was -- many, many years after the fact -- explained to me in passing to be for the exact reason you describe. It seems neigh impossible to me to validate that the spanking was "necessary" in any reasonable interpretation of the word; sure, I was never hit by a car as a kid, but you can't really prove a negative either. I can say, unequivocally, however, that 2-year-old me experienced the spanking as a completely arbitrary and utterly humiliating display of violence with absolutely no rhyme or reason whatsoever.

Have you ever met 1 years old? Cause this sounds like you did not and are just imagining things.

I have, yes - four of them, up close and in detail.

So the explanation is more important than the spanking (or other discipline).